Dude, I get it. This and other Kickstarters aren't typical venture-capital investments. In fact, I think that is by design; I think that in the U.S., there are regulatory issues with crowd-funding venture capital, and so Kickstarter is intentionally structured this way.
I see below where you replied to an AC with:

But buying an item at a discount isn't an investment. It's like coming home from the mall with 20 shirts you didn't intend to buy and saying "but I saved money, they were on sale!"

That is not what happened in the case of Pebble. What happened is: I ponied up $110 in a "pledge" (read: angel investment,) for what amounted to a 0.001% stake. Then, prior to the first VC round, the future value of my equity was discounted back to present value, and paid to me in the currency of a Pebble watch, currently valued at $150.

Yes, I am saying the above somewhat tongue-in-cheek. But my primary point is: the only reason it is done this way is to work around regulatory issues.

I think what the OP meant was: because the original transmission was over https, he feels confident in discounting the possibility of an eavesdropper, as opposed to the company just being lax and/or promiscuous with his information.

I did get a tiny part of the profits... in the form of a 27% discount on the smartwatch.

Kickstarters are not angel investors. Usually-- and this was the case with Pebble-- Kickstarters are prepaying for the device, and those prepayments fund development and initial manufacturing. And, the amount raised through Kickstarter was $10M, not $15M. (The latter is the figure that the VC is adding.)
Yes, I was a Kickstarter backer for Pebble. And, I received mine, at the stated discount. So I got my expected ROI.

Kickstarters are not angel investors. Usually-- and this was the case with Pebble-- Kickstarters are prepaying for the device, and those prepayments fund development and initial manufacturing.
Yes, I was a Kickstarter backer for Pebble. And, I received mine, at the stated discount. So I got my expected ROI.

Yes... it is a hapax legomenon.

And the problem with deflationary currency is that no one wants to spend it, because it will be worth more tomorrow.
A little bit of inflation is good, in that it discourages mattress-stuffing.

Say what? Then please explain why any semi-attractive woman who dons a pair, instantly becomes twice as hawt.

Yes, capital gains, sorry. :) I was speaking loosely. I'd have gotten it right on my Schedule D, come tax time.

Yep, capital gains, sorry. :) I was speaking loosely. I'd have gotten in right on my Schedule D.

I haven't heard any libertarians espousing bitcoin as a means of evading taxes. I just sold mine from 2010, and I am well aware of the need to pay income tax on the net proceeds. Just like anything else.

Maybe what is needed is some software that can remember to download for you? And alert you on those occasions where it fails to do so? I'm not saying that is superior to your suggestion... just, more likely to actually happen.

It's not as bad as that. BTC is the wrong unit of measurement here. It's only being used because we are still at the beginning of the BTC inflation ramp. BTCs are divisible down to 8 decimal places, meaning there are 100,000,000 satoshis per BTC. Eventually, at these valuations, prices will be quoted in satoshis (or, if you prefer, decimal fractions of BTC.)